Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Ferrari et al. v. Cuomo et al.
as 1:2023cv07715
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH FERRARI, as Administrator of the Estate of CHRISTINE FERRARI, LEOVA JENKINS, as Administrator of the Estate of ELOISE BROOKS, IRASEMA RIVERA, as Administrator of the Estate of PAUL RIVERA and others
Defendant:
Ex-Governor ANDREW M. CUOMO, HOWARD A. ZUCKER, MELISSA DEROSA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MELENDEZ RODRIGUEZ et al v. BEAU THAI MT. PLEASANT, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv00555
Defendant:
ASCHARA VIGSITTABOOT and BEAU THAI MT. PLEASANT, LLC doing business as BEAU THAI
Plaintiff:
JOSE MONGE RAMIREZ and NOEL MELENDEZ RODRIGUEZ
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
MONGE et al v. HITHER CREEK, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv00337
Plaintiff:
CHRISTIAN RAMIREZ, VICTOR NERY-CANAHUI, OLVIN ALEXANDER NATAREN and others
Defendant:
ROBERT BLAIR, HITHER CREEK, LLC doing business as MILLIE'S RESTAURANT doing business as MILLIE'S NANTUCKET and DAVID M. SCRIBNER
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
MONGE v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv70687
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
WILSON JOSE MONGE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MONGE RAMIREZ v. 2121 K STREET, LLC et al
as 1:2019cv01930
Defendant:
2121 K STREET, LLC, MURAT ALI SIYAM and EMRE BEKTAS
Plaintiff:
JOSE MONGE RAMIREZ
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
SOSA RAMIREZ et al v. SHANGHAI TOKYO CAFE OF DC CORP. et al
as 1:2017cv02430
Plaintiff:
JOSE SOSA RAMIREZ , JOSE MONGE RAMIREZ and JOSE ALVARENGAS URVINA
Defendant:
SHANGHAI TOKYO CAFE OF DC CORP. and ZHONG JIE CHEN
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Armenta et al v. Dirty Bird Group LLC et al
as 1:2013cv04603
Plaintiff:
Armando Armenta , Fausto Armenta , Gabriel Arvizu and others
Defendant:
Dirty Bird Group LLC, Joseph Ciriello, Mark Kolski and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
